About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)
have harry reid running the place. he can do what he wants, whenever he wants. his lieutenants, they run the place as well and they're extremely partisan. but bottom line is people need to understand they can pretty much do anything they want because they're in the majority party. the only tools republicans have are to slow things down, law for full -- allow for full and fair debate and an open vote. they file bills, move for closure. and then try to ram it through. that's now how we should legislate. especially now. >> neil: nothing seems to change. >> you're right. >> neil: he's going to keep ramming through executive orders and spending. republicans argue they're not going to allow it. >> listen, you're right. he says he wants to reach across the aisle. you have senators like susan colins and others who are hopeful we'll get things done and work in a bipartisan manner then if it does it go the administration's way, he says we'll do it through check executive order. we need to work together as americans and find consensus and work on things we agree on. american people are de
to settle on passing background legislation and calling that a win. on abc over the weekend, harry reid pointedly would not commit to supporting an assault weapons ban. >> i didn't vote for the assault weapons last time because it didn't make sense but i'll take a look at it. i think everyone acknowledges we should do some background checks. >> reid said the senate would move the bill through the judiciary committee, it's unlikely to include a gun ban. though reid has said california senator dianne feinstein will have an opportunity to present the provision as an amendment once the bill reaches the senate floor. remember there's a whole bunch of red tape democrats want to actively cascade a vote against the assault weapons ban so they can show they are pro-gun. >> the super bowl ad new york city mayor's group ran in the d.c. market focused on one part of the gun control bills and that's the background check, one pointing out the nra at one time supported closing the gun show loophole. >> we think it's reasonable to provide mandatory, instant criminal background checks for every sale at
congressional leaders from both houses and both parties. so that's mitch mcconnell, harry reid, nancy pelosi and john boehner. in response i think to the number of democrats and the first lady bringing victims of gun violence with them as guests to the state of the union this year, to highlight that issue, one republican member of congress this year has decided to do his part to advance the serious consideration of gun violence and lawful gun ownership in america by inviting as his guest for the state of the union this gentleman. >> hey obama, you might want to suck on one of these, you punk! obama, he's a piece of [ bleep ] and i told him to suck on my machine gun. let's hear it for him. i said hey, humor me. you might want to ride one of these into the sunset, you worthless [ bleep ]. >> mr. ted nugent is a musician. i believe he is still mostly known for "cat scratch fever", but i could be wrong. he was investigated by the secret service last year after telling an nra convention in april of 2012, quote, if barack obama is elected, i'll either be dead or in jail this time next year." texas
override -- harry reid yesterday said the nra is just one organization among many. we listen to them but that doesn't mean we follow them. can we override the nra on these background checks? will we this time? 866-55-press. one other gun-related item that caught my attention that i find disgusting, this headline in "the new york times," got the whole article because i clipped it, it bugged me so much the most wanted gun in america. you know what happened up in newtown connecticut on december 14th, this union gunman broke into sandy hill elementary school, takes out his ar 15, mos down 20 innocent 6 graders, some of them shot 10, 11 times action with that ar 15, also mowed down and killed six innocent teachers and supervisors there at that school the police say that's the weapon he used, the ar 15. so what did we do about it? what did americans do about that? did they turn in disgust at that weapon, that semi automatic assault rifle? did they say this good shall beould be banned because nobody needs a gun like that to defend himself or her family? we did the opposite
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)